Wednesday, October 20, 2010

spotting the fallacies - you are guilty - a boy has a 'message' - post 9/11: reorganized British Empire - WWf, Greenpeace: british Intelligence?

Greenpeace was founded in 1971 out of the Don't Make a Wave Committee, by a coalition of Maoists, Trotskyists, and Canadian members of the Sierra Club. Its first head, Ben Metcalfe, had worked for British Intelligence in postwar Germany. The idea was to create a 'direct action'' terrorist arm of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). One of the founding members of the World Wildlife Fund was Sir Julian Sorell Huxley. The WWF is now the world's largest independent conservation organization with over 5 million supporters worldwide, working in more than 90 countries, supporting around 1300 conservation and environmental projects around the world including in Russia operating out of NGO's. One of the former directors of Greenpeace was Lord Peter Melchett, heir to the Imperial Chemical Industries fortune of Alfred Moritz Mond, 1st Baron Melchett.

While there is a lot of lip service coming from Greenpeace to the idea that all of these environmental and population-control policies are intended to benefit mankind by preserving Mother Earth, their primary purpose it is alleged, is to destroy scientific and technological progress, thus depriving mankind of its most important tools to nurture nature, and to drive the world's natural resources into the hands of multinational corporations that are an integral part of the present-day, reorganized British Empire known as the British Commonwealth.

You are now invited to watch this short video to spot the fallacies of what is being presented to the public as news and information, in this case: environmental destruction. Observe closely as this little heathen, apologies, we mean, little boy, who by the way, is being exploited by the adults from Greenpeace who put him up to the task of filming this video, explain your guilt for destroying the environment.

Can you spot the fallacies?

1 comment:

  1. It's a fallacy to think that people will listen to an advert with a boy in it. They should have gone with a girl. To see more info please visit essayswriters.org/academic-writing.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Looking into our circumstances...